LG Timing not Accuracy Forum

[Jcastro1]

So after about a month of drilling by type (and reading the Manhattan and PS LG books) I can almost always go -1 on an LG section but it takes me 36-38 minutes, which would kill me on the real test. Also, the -1 is nearly always a clumsy error, like circling the wrong answer choice by accident when I've found the right one and then bubbling the wrong one.

Since it is not really particular game types that are troubling me but rather finishing the section on time with -0, I was thinking of printing off all the LG sections from PT 1-47 and doing each one twice (PTs 48+ are reserved for full length tests) Would this be the right approach? My goal is 170 or up.

[gaud]

Yes, that approach should help with your timing.

Good luck!

[cc.celina]

Yes, that approach should help with your timing.

Good luck!

Agreed. Also, overanalyze a few of these of different types to make sure your diagramming is as efficient as it can possibly be. At first I made really detailed diagrams, which was a time suck, and if you figure out little ways you can streamline how much you write, you can save yourself a few seconds per question. It's a frustrating process to get LG down comfortably within the time limit, but luckily it's one of the most doable milestones, so you'll get there eventually!

[Instinctive]

So after about a month of drilling by type (and reading the Manhattan and PS LG books) I can almost always go -1 on an LG section but it takes me 36-38 minutes, which would kill me on the real test. Also, the -1 is nearly always a clumsy error, like circling the wrong answer choice by accident when I've found the right one and then bubbling the wrong one.

Since it is not really particular game types that are troubling me but rather finishing the section on time with -0, I was thinking of printing off all the LG sections from PT 1-47 and doing each one twice (PTs 48+ are reserved for full length tests) Would this be the right approach? My goal is 170 or up.

Where are you printing them off? I'm having a similar issue.

[vman21]

<('.'<)

[ScottRiqui]

So after about a month of drilling by type (and reading the Manhattan and PS LG books) I can almost always go -1 on an LG section but it takes me 36-38 minutes, which would kill me on the real test. Also, the -1 is nearly always a clumsy error, like circling the wrong answer choice by accident when I've found the right one and then bubbling the wrong one.

Since it is not really particular game types that are troubling me but rather finishing the section on time with -0, I was thinking of printing off all the LG sections from PT 1-47 and doing each one twice (PTs 48+ are reserved for full length tests) Would this be the right approach? My goal is 170 or up.

Within a particular LG, are you working the problems in order, or do you skip around? I've been amazed at how quickly some of the overall "must be true/cannot be true" questions go when I save them for last and use my prior work. (I haven't read through PS or Manhattan yet, so I don't know whether or not they advocate skipping around).

[cc.celina]

Within a particular LG, are you working the problems in order, or do you skip around? I've been amazed at how quickly some of the overall "must be true/cannot be true" questions go when I save them for last and use my prior work. (I haven't read through PS or Manhattan yet, so I don't know whether or not they advocate skipping around).

It's been a while since I read them, but I'm pretty sure they do, and for good reason. As a rule of thumb, do all the local questions (those with conditions in the question stem) FIRST - things like, "If Sara goes on Tuesday, when must Mary go?" That way, when you get to the global questions ("What days can Mary go?") you already have some diagrams written down that you don't have to re-sketch.